Home Appointed contractors

[devil666]

Hi Can the Insurance Company insist that we use their approved contractor or can we insist on using our own contractor who we trust with keys and alarm codes I dont want just anyone roaming the house that i dont know .They say i must use their builder .If my builder can do it for th esame cost as their builder and furnish an final account vat bill whats their problem
Need guidence on this please legal if anyone knows

 

[Claimsman]

Re: Appointed contracrtors

Hi Can the Insurance Company insist that we use their approved contractor or can we insist on using our own contractor who we trust with keys and alarm codes I dont want just anyone roaming the house that i dont know .They say i must use their builder .If my builder can do it for th esame cost as their builder and furnish an final account vat bill whats their problem
Need guidence on this please legal if anyone knows

In short, Insurers are within their rights under the policy.Take a look at this document. It probably says something along the lines of...we will cover you, by payment, or, at our option by reinstatement, replacement or repair.

If this is stipulated on your policy, then Insurers, if they so wish (at their option), can decide that they will excercise their right to deal with your claim by reinstatement....in other words, they can appoint a builder and have him to do the work to your home, whether you like it or not. This is known as excercising their right to reinstate.

If you fail to allow their builder access to do the work, then, technically, you will be in breach of the policy conditions and this could give grounds for insurers to consider their position in relation to your claim.

There is another thread on this, "claim dispute". The various merits and potential problems with Insurers excercising their right to reinstatement are elaborated on in this thread and you may find this of some benefit.

 

[tommygirl]

Re: Appointed contracrtors

I have a general query regarding home insurance claims. I have read the Claim Dispute thread.
We have a 1940s cottage that was unfortunately flooded in November. When the plasterboard was removed, there was extensive evidence of dry rot which would be extremely expensive to fix. We were planning to extend in the next few years so we are in the process of applying for planning permission to demolish and rebuild a larger house (council are in favour of our plan).
We have used an assessor for our flood claim and the details are being finalised at the moment. We obviously are only claiming for flood damage as the rot problems were pre-existing.
I am getting conflicting advise regarding our plans. Our assessor is saying that we should not tell our insurance company that we are knocking and rebuilding. We cannot understand this as when the adjustor comes back to inspect there will be a different house higher up on the site so it will be obvious that we did not re-instate. For future insurance we would be arguing that we have raised the house and are therefore no longer at risk of flood damage but not sure if this would work.
Am I correct in thinking that we settle the claim and then we can use this money to rebuild - as long as we have receipts in the amounts that were claimed e.g. plastering, flooring etc. We are only trying to make the best of a bad situation and are not trying to scam anyone.
I would appreciate any advise
Tommygirl